Cash strapped N.C. looks to milk money out of citizens in its battered local economy

When
it comes to internet purchases, you're supposed to
individually list them on your yearly tax return and then pay back
sales taxes to the state. Of course, few people do this.
Now the government of North Carolina and other
states are battling Amazon.com
and other e-tailers to get these records.

Amazon.com this
week filed
suit against the North Carolina state government --
specifically, the Department of Revenue (DOR) -- claiming that
the state's demand for records of virtually every North Carolina
resident who has purchased anything from Amazon since 2003 was
not only unreasonable, but a violation of privacy.

Amazon
writes in a filing for the case, "In re: Amazon.com LLC vs
Kenneth R. Lay", Case No. 10-00664, U.S. District Court, Western
District of Washington, "[T]he DOR has no business seeking to
uncover the identity of Amazon's customers who purchased expressive
content, which makes up the majority of the nearly 50 million
products sold to North Carolina residents during the audit
period."

If the case is lost, Amazon may have to turn
over the records of millions of its customers in North Carolina.
Those individuals who purchased from Amazon (but did not report their
purchase on their tax returns) might be audited and face civil
penalties. At the very least, they would likely be expected to repay
back taxes on the items they failed to report to the government.

In
North Carolina, failing to pay state sales taxes is handled as a
civil infraction. Under the codes
105 236(5)c. and 105 236(5)a., citizens can face additional
fines for dodging state taxes. The penalty would likely be to
pay 25 percent more tax, except on small items, which would require
taxpayers to pay only an additional 10 percent fine.

The fight
is the latest in the growing trend of states hungering for internet
tax revenue. Many states have passed or are debating laws that
would tax
digital downloads such as those offered by Amazon, Steam,
Apple's iTunes store, or others. While many in the public have
complained about excessive taxation on the federal level, it is
actually the states that have been pushing the most for bigger taxes
of late. The federal government has made some mild efforts
to fight
taxation of the internet.

Comments

Threshold

Username

Password

remember me

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Hell, they subsidise entire industries (Farming anyome?) to keep them economically viable. Hell, farming subsidies may cost several hundred billion, but they do increase the supply of food, driving down prices for everyone else. Of course, since we dont "see" where the money is going, we yell about how much we pay (which is still less then any other western nation).

Of course, our two biggest expenses are Medicare/Medicade and Military Spending, and one party in particular has made it clear that we can never under any circumstances cut funding for those two entities, so where exactly does that leave us?

I also note: The Feds are running a deficit, as are the states, as are the people who elect to those positions, ordinary americans. Maybe people should start looking in the mirror before asking why government doesn't work right...government in a democracy mirrors its people, after all.

quote:Hell, they subsidise entire industries (Farming anyome?) to keep them economically viable. Hell, farming subsidies may cost several hundred billion, but they do increase the supply of food, driving down prices for everyone else. Of course, since we dont "see" where the money is going, we yell about how much we pay (which is still less then any other western nation).

Why should we subsidize industries? That model was tried and failed in communist Russia.

What's the point of claiming to have a free market, if you've essentially nationalized large portions of it behind the scenes?

quote: Of course, our two biggest expenses are Medicare/Medicade and Military Spending, and one party in particular has made it clear that we can never under any circumstances cut funding for those two entities, so where exactly does that leave us?

Both parties share some guilt here. The Democrats typically try to burden the taxpayer with the cost of paying for programs like welfare that take from those working taxpayers and give to those who generally are too lazy to educate themselves and get a job.

The Republicans, meanwhile wisely recognize that defense spending is essential, but they often go overboard committing to costly military campaigns outside the U.S.

There are some voices of reason within both parties, but often the loudest voices calling for reform are equally corrupt. Look at Sarah Palin who is advocating "fiscal responsibility" and rallying the Tea Party, when she as governor endorsed millions in pork barrel initiatives.

The sad fact is both parties are badly broken at this point, and that there's little point to voting for third parties. The best we can hope for is try to educate ourselves on the track record of our local politicians and support candidates who actually practice fiscal responsibility and oppose those who do not, regardless of the party.

quote: Maybe people should start looking in the mirror before asking why government doesn't work right...government in a democracy mirrors its people, after all.

This is a constitutional republic not a democracy. Though one could argue we are no longer a republic as the representatives in congress don't consult or care about the constitution anymore. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2iiirr5KI8

I come from a farming family and I can tell you that the subsidies really don't make it down to the farmers. Maybe some of the buyers make out good on them I don't know. The only "subsidies" most farmers get are low interest loans which have to be paid back even if a crop fails. And usually you are required to carry crop insurance if you take the loans which then eats into any profit a farmer may make. If it cost a farmer $3 per bushel to grow corn, and at the end of the year the price of corn is $2 per bushel, then the farmer just has to take a loss. It is one of the few industries where the producer of the good has no say in what the selling price will be.